When 2 Club lengths isn't...

[drdel]

It seems to have become acceptable on the 'Tours' to be fairly lax when taking 2 Club lengths as relief.

I noticed on the PGA this weekend that one of our famous golfers (I'm not criticising the player so will not name him) left his Driver head-cover in place.

He took his 2 lengths by laying the Driver down grip end near the hazard then rolled the club over the head-cover and then took his mark at the grip end. My school geometry tells me a large cover is about 10cm in diameter so the act of rolling add about 15cm to the line of relief.

Does it really matter - not a lot: how careful are you guys when taking relief?

(Quiet day!)

 

[Foxholer]

It seems to have become acceptable on the 'Tours' to be fairly lax when taking 2 Club lengths as relief.

I noticed on the PGA this weekend that one of our famous golfers (I'm not criticising the player so will not name him) left his Driver head-cover in place.

He took his 2 lengths by laying the Driver down grip end near the hazard then rolled the club over the head-cover and then took his mark at the grip end. My school geometry tells me a large cover is about 10cm in diameter so the act of rolling add about 15cm to the line of relief.

Does it really matter - not a lot: how careful are you guys when taking relief?

(Quiet day!)

If it's the one I remember (Watney?), there was an explanation of why that wasn't pulled up as a breach. I'm sure there were hundreds, if not thousands, of phone calls about it.

Sure the clubhead was left on. But the tee used to mark the 'within 2 club lengths' was placed a considerable distance closer to the hazard than where the limit with the cover on. So all good, if a little lazy - as IBF (I think) mentioned!

 

[chrisd]

V

If it's the one I remember (Watney?), there was an explanation of why that wasn't pulled up as a breach. I'm sure there were hundreds, if not thousands, of phone calls about it.

Sure the clubhead was left on. But the tee used to mark the 'within 2 club lengths' was placed a considerable distance closer to the hazard than where the limit with the cover on. So all good, if a little lazy - as IBF (I think) mentioned!

Is the correct answer!